Forums Menu

User: 
Pass:  

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M7 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 8:00pm CT
Lannoye  
Hebert    Watch Live Curling!
Fitzgerald 2nd
Cenzalli  Watch Live Curling!
Brenden 2nd
Church  Watch Live Curling!
Guentzel 2nd
Rose  Watch Live Curling!
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W6 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 4:00pm CT
Berg Final
Scheel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Berg Final
Schapman (10) Watch Live Curling!
Giroux 10  Final
Pekowitz (9) Watch Live Curling!
Viau Final
Johnson (10) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

CurlingZone : Powered by vBulletin>
<smallfont><b><a href=CurlingZone > Chat Forums > General Curling Chat > Rock Talk > WCF Sweeping Summit 2016 near Ottawa is underway

Disclaimer: CurlingZone does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any Content posted on any Forums area and you acknowledge that any reliance upon such Content shall be at your sole risk. Any Content placed on any Forums area by users and anonymous posters are the views of the user posting the statement, and do not represent the views of CurlingZone or our partners, advertisers or sponsors. By posting anonymously, you are allowing your IP address to be displayed for identification purposes. CurlingZone reserves the right to remove any post at its discretion without warning or explanation.
Page 4 of 5 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread   Post A Reply
07-06-16 10:46AM
biterbar is offline Click Here to See the Profile for biterbar Click here to Send biterbar a Private Message Find more posts by biterbar Add biterbar to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
biterbar
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

Good post On the Nose. And don't forget BP, who also has claimed their actions (including the debut of the blackhead "to make a point",)was also in the best interests of curling, are continuing to manufacture brooms that will allow the "non-elites" to continue this fiasco of directional sweeping. Of course the club players "will need to explain" why they need them to which the answer is "to compete with other curlers who continue to use directional fabrics".

Who are these "other curlers", Hardline users"? Shouldn't BP, HL and the others all agree that they won't sell these fabrics so clubs won't have to make their own sweeping technique rules to outlaw the snowplowing and corner sweeping that make the fabrics joystick a stone?

The BP answer on this thread is ridiculous at best. We are not "missing the point". If the "Black Diamond" comes to a store near me I will be burning my BP Broom and shoes and heading somewhere else or quitting curling completely. I can't compete in my twilight years with younger people who will continue to make shot throwing a secondary skill.

Figure it out BP and DO WHAT IS RIGHT!

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Last edited by biterbar on 07-06-16 at 10:52AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-06-16 11:34AM
dks is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dks Click here to Send dks a Private Message Find more posts by dks Add dks to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dks
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Oct 2012
Location:
Posts: 119

Assuming the post by Balance Plus is genuine, I am surprised that they will market the Black Magic/Head brush. I feel that every curled regardless of skill should be using approved equipment. The fact that the broom summit seems to confirm that fabric was the most significant factor in rock movement should be enough that curlers would want to all be playing on a level playing field. If it is not acceptable at the WCF level, then it should not be allowed at games that follow Curling Canada general rules of play. If your league or bonspiel has different rules, then go for it, but, if you follow the rules of general play it should match the WCF rules regarding equipment. Still I hope Balance Plus reverses it decision to sell the Blackhead. Bad public relations I think.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-06-16 01:02PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

Actually dks, no one has seen anything about the summit that confirms the fabrics were the major influence over technique. Matter of fact we are just taking a press release from one group with a genuine bias towards a certain result at face value, as fact. Until all aspects of the summit become available for public consumption everything is just speculation based on heresay. The WCF has to support fabric over technique as they spent all of last season pushing that theory on the public, putting in place a ban on products with no proof. I think when it all comes out we will be shown different facts from what we are being fed now.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-06-16 05:19PM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:
Originally posted by curlky
recboy, assuming your sources are right, then I think that this is mostly as expected, except I am surprised to hear that color has an effect. I suppose certain dyes have a different chemical structure that makes the bonds more "sharp".


Fabric color potentially has an impact on heat transfer. A black head should be a better radiator than a white one. The effect may be small, but even small effects can confer an advantage when used over a long distance or a long time interval. So color could conceivably affect distance, and perhaps "carving" as well, as heat transfer may help soften the ice surface making it easier to scratch.

Cheers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-06-16 06:17PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

From what I understand all fabrics used for the tour events, the Maxim and the Elite will have a mandated colour which i think is yellow, so colour and different possible effects are moot.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-16 10:04AM
MacCoach is offline Click Here to See the Profile for MacCoach Click here to Send MacCoach a Private Message Find more posts by MacCoach Add MacCoach to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
MacCoach
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Jan 2015
Location:
Posts: 18

Club Rulings & Local Spiels

With the WCF/CCA findings I hope clubs & local spiels take the club curlers into consideration when setting rules. From all indications the new fabric used by all manufacturers may only last a game or 2??? That's a lot of broom heads/covers over the course of a season. I hope clubs & spiel organizer's allow players to at least use heads/covers that are more (i e waterproof or water resistant). And what about broom heads all clubs have in stock from last year?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-13-16 10:29AM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

Re: Club Rulings & Local Spiels

quote:
Originally posted by MacCoach
With the WCF/CCA findings I hope clubs & local spiels take the club curlers into consideration when setting rules. From all indications the new fabric used by all manufacturers may only last a game or 2??? That's a lot of broom heads/covers over the course of a season. I hope clubs & spiel organizer's allow players to at least use heads/covers that are more (i e waterproof or water resistant). And what about broom heads all clubs have in stock from last year?


I agree. Club and recreational curlers need to have an option to use an ethically defensible, more durable fabric for club and bonspiel play. Certainly not one of the artificially textured materials, but perhaps something like the Norway or Warthog fabric. Both are very durable, but do not have the aggressively textured surfaces. The "traditional" coated Cordura fabric (e.g. "TX" fabric) is very effective in single-sweeping. For dusters it won't matter what material is used. But for better club curlers, certain fabrics could be used to significant advantage.

Cheers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-14-16 08:33AM
biterbar is offline Click Here to See the Profile for biterbar Click here to Send biterbar a Private Message Find more posts by biterbar Add biterbar to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
biterbar
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

I really like the term "ethically defendable" form the normal club play. I wonder if the broom manufacturers can incorporate that into their sales pitch. Much more acceptable then "Get the Black Diamond, you can steer the heck out of stones while damaging your ice surface as well"!

Did they bring in any "non-elite" sweepers to use in the study of fabrics while they had this brain trust working on the issue? Did they get an average sweeper, an above average sweeper or anyone else to see how different fabrics reacted to less than elite technique?

If not it seemed like a missed opportunity to address the situation for all levels especially since it affects the 99% as well.

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-14-16 11:28AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

I'm very interested to see the NRC data. Especially what tests were done with what equipment. For example: What about hair brushes? Very little mention is made in the WCF press release about a tool used for over 50 years without issues.

It's also worth noting that Nolan Thiessen's laughable blog featuring old brier footage (with zero evidence of directional influence) is all hair brushes.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-14-16 10:16PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

quote:
Originally posted by biterbar
I really like the term "ethically defendable" form the normal club play. I wonder if the broom manufacturers can incorporate that into their sales pitch. Much more acceptable then "Get the Black Diamond, you can steer the heck out of stones while damaging your ice surface as well"!

Did they bring in any "non-elite" sweepers to use in the study of fabrics while they had this brain trust working on the issue? Did they get an average sweeper, an above average sweeper or anyone else to see how different fabrics reacted to less than elite technique?

If not it seemed like a missed opportunity to address the situation for all levels especially since it affects the 99% as well.



I addressed this way back in this thread biter.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-15-16 02:55PM
biterbar is offline Click Here to See the Profile for biterbar Click here to Send biterbar a Private Message Find more posts by biterbar Add biterbar to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
biterbar
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13


I addressed this way back in this thread biter.



Yes, I see that now. They were probably afraid to discover that the front end on a club team comprised of a farmer and concrete worker could sweep at an efficiency closer to the elite's than they were willing to admit. Tough to call the outlawed brooms ethically defendable at that point.

__________________
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire"-Winston Churchill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-15-16 11:32PM
On The Nose is offline Click Here to See the Profile for On The Nose Find more posts by On The Nose Add On The Nose to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
On The Nose
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Apr 2014
Location: In the House
Posts: 608

quote:
Originally posted by biterbar


They were probably afraid to discover that the front end on a club team comprised of a farmer and concrete worker could sweep at an efficiency closer to the elite's than they were willing to admit. Tough to call the outlawed brooms ethically defendable at that point.


^ Had me laughing...
And I don't at all disagree.

As for ethics and integrity... no matter how much those two elements are mentioned, I fail to see any evidence of either by anyone directly involved with this matter.

__________________
"It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own... but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-16-16 12:19PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

Have to agree with Nose and Biterbar. This nonsense about the 'elite' being overly superior brushers is bull.

There is very little skill required to be as effective as the sweepers used in the tests. Yes, being in top physical shape is an as set-as is youth. However, I'd happily make the wager that within an hour of instruction 90% of recreational players could become just as effective as these so-called professionals (sorry folks to burst your bubble, but there is still no such thing as professional curlers. Hell, we ain't even reached semi-pro yet).

But all this bafflegab coming from self-appointed elites and the WCF proves, once again, that this is about technique and less about technology. Why? Read the WCF press release.

It states that the impact of directional sweeping is reduced when brushing at a close to 90% angle. But here's the tip off: they refuse to disclose how much it was reduced. Implying that there is still some influence on the course of the stone.

Well, duh. Any sweeping is always going to have an impact. If you want absolutely zero impact then have NO sweeping-like lawn bloody bowling.

So you admit-in very reluctant language-that technique is huge. But you then cover it up by quickly returning to your preferred argument (to protect the fact that you made idiotic decisions about equipment without getting any facts) that ALL brooms are 'bad' except the ones they want to make money from.

You're being played folks. Pure and simple. Can't wait to see the NRC data about all this.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 07-16-16 at 12:26PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-16-16 04:37PM
dugless_zone 13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for dugless_zone 13 Click here to Send dugless_zone 13 a Private Message Find more posts by dugless_zone 13 Add dugless_zone 13 to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
dugless_zone 13
Drawmaster

 

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: the Banana Belt
Posts: 990

I think that the data could already have been released. It will be withheld for as long as possible so rules can be written and passed that may serve the WCF and Curling Canada's agenda.
, even if the research shows different.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-16-16 05:04PM
Itsjustagame is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Itsjustagame Find more posts by Itsjustagame Add Itsjustagame to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Itsjustagame
Hitting Paint

 

Registered: Aug 2014
Location:
Posts: 106

quote:
Originally posted by dugless_zone 13
I think that the data could already have been released. It will be withheld for as long as possible so rules can be written and passed that may serve the WCF and Curling Canada's agenda.
, even if the research shows different.



So far everyone seems happy about the new rules ''because they did testing and they have data''. After last season's fiasco? Rules were,so it seems, made up to please the friends of the house!

Good to see I am not the only one who wants to see the method and results of the testing before chanting this was the best solution for the development and integrity of the game. Why take so long?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-21-16 11:30AM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan
I'm very interested to see the NRC data. Especially what tests were done with what equipment. For example: What about hair brushes? Very little mention is made in the WCF press release about a tool used for over 50 years without issues.

It's also worth noting that Nolan Thiessen's laughable blog featuring old brier footage (with zero evidence of directional influence) is all hair brushes.



The whole sweeping issue is a confluence of several issues, including but not limited to (1) brushing materials, (2) technique, (3) rock texturing, and (4) ice surface quality.

On slower ice, I would expect that directional sweeping would be much less effective, as the cross-sheet velocities achievable with the relative sideward acceleration of the stone made possible from microscratches is a much smaller percentage of the forward velocity of the stone on slower ice. Plus, you have less time for that sideward acceleration to exert an effect on say, 22-23 second ice compared to 25-26 second ice. And highly textured stones have more micro-bumps on them to catch microscratches. Bottom line: the faster you make the ice, and the more aggressive you make the rocks, the more dramatic directional sweeping effects can be. Faster and faster ice has made some aspects of curling more exciting (love those cross-house doubles and runback triples?) but opens doors to more objectionable effects (excessive directional sweeping). Club players, even strong sweepers, won't be able to see the effects on club ice that you see on championship ice: club ice is often slower, and stones not as aggressively textured as for championship play.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-21-16 02:36PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by RockDoc


The whole sweeping issue is a confluence of several issues, including but not limited to (1) brushing materials, (2) technique, (3) rock texturing, and (4) ice surface quality.

On slower ice, I would expect that directional sweeping would be much less effective, as the cross-sheet velocities achievable with the relative sideward acceleration of the stone made possible from microscratches is a much smaller percentage of the forward velocity of the stone on slower ice. Plus, you have less time for that sideward acceleration to exert an effect on say, 22-23 second ice compared to 25-26 second ice. And highly textured stones have more micro-bumps on them to catch microscratches. Bottom line: the faster you make the ice, and the more aggressive you make the rocks, the more dramatic directional sweeping effects can be. Faster and faster ice has made some aspects of curling more exciting (love those cross-house doubles and runback triples?) but opens doors to more objectionable effects (excessive directional sweeping). Club players, even strong sweepers, won't be able to see the effects on club ice that you see on championship ice: club ice is often slower, and stones not as aggressively textured as for championship play.



Fair enough, you make some general presumptions that IMO have some validity. But you're introducing variables and presumptions with no data to back them up. And it bears reminding that regardless of ice or stones we're dealing with micro-millimetres as the difference between a made or missed shot.

So the question is then: are the ice and stones really that much of a factor? Because if we follow your theory then a good club sweeper will have the same impact no matter the playing surface or the stones. If anything they would simply see a greater influence under arena event conditions than at their home club.

The reverse also applies. Have a cashspiel at a club and the competitive players won't be able to impact the stone as much. But, competitive or club player, arena or club ice, championship or club stones the effect of directional sweeping is the same: it reduces the amount of throwing skill required to execute a successful outcome.

This is where the summit conducted sloppy science: the valid variables you mention weren't tested. If the effects of directional sweeping, regardless of ice or stones, are comparable on a percentage basis then the issue boils down-to once again-the technique and technology question.

For expediency I don't have a problem with the sweepers who were utilized for the testing. Granted, it would have been nice to have a range of abilities present, but at the very least two facilities could easily have been used simultaneously to gather data under different conditions. Then we'd have some truly useful data.

Let me give you an example: the USGA uses Iron Byron to test new clubs and balls. Well, if you have your landing area cut to 1/8" the ball might travel 300 yards. If it's 1/2" it only goes 275. But if prior data shows that previous test products travelled 25% less on both lengths of fairway then the playing surface conditions are cancelled out. The same tests can be used for technique. They simply adjust the club head speed to adjust for a pro or recreational athlete. Thus,they can measure if the overall impact-professional or recreational player-is the same.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 07-21-16 at 03:29PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-21-16 03:18PM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan


Fair enough, you make some general presumptions that IMO have some validity. But you make your presumptions with no data to back them up. And it bears reminding that regardless of ice or stones we're dealing with micro-millimetres as the difference between a made or missed shot.

So the question is then: are the ice and stones really that much of a factor? Because if we follow your theory then a good club sweeper will have the same impact no matter the playing surface or the stones. If anything they would simply see a greater influence than at their home club.

The reverse also applies. Have a cashspiel at a club and the competitive players won't be able to impact the stone as much. But, competitive or club player, arena or club ice, championship or club stones the effect of directional sweeping is the same: it reduces the amount of throwing skill required to execute a successful outcome.

This is where the summit conducted sloppy science. If the effects of directional sweeping, regardless of ice or stones, are comparable on a percentage basis then the issue boils down-to once again-the technique and technology question.

For expediency I don't have a problem with the sweepers who were utilized for the testing. But two facilities could easily have been used simultaneously to gather data under different conditions.

Let me give you an example: the USGA uses Iron Byron to test new clubs and balls. Well, if you have your landing area cut to 1/8" the ball might travel 300 yards. If it's 1/2" it only goes 275. But if prior data shows that previous test products travelled 25% less on both lengths of fairway then the playing surface conditions are cancelled out. The overall impact is the same.



I have no data that I can share, but I do have what appears to be a well-established theory from which to work, which is the Nyberg mechanism of curl. That mechanism would clearly predict that the attainable sideward acceleration would be proportional to the density of microbumps on the bottom of the stone (the scratches are provided primarily by brushing in directional sweeping), and that the magnitude of the sideward acceleration will be essentially independent of ice speed. However, the attainable relative sideward velocity of the stone (compared to the forward velocity) will be higher on faster ice, because the forward motion of the stone is slower (so the angle of travel will be deflected more). If we observed anything different in practice, it would be astonishing. Regardless of the mechanism of curl, since all "curl" must be the result of the relative sideward vs. forward motion of the stone.

The main point is that I think it is unrealistic to think that there is only one factor that is important in directional sweeping. The current rulemaking has addressed the fabric component, and that is in my opinion a good place to start. I agree with many that the effect of directional sweeping is to reduce the accuracy required in the stone release to make a desired shot. You can easily see this effect even at the club level on club ice. I've done it with my own bonspiel teams, and it's works better than you would expect. That's why I think it would be responsible to think about extending some of the rulemaking to the amateur as well as elite level, with some consideration to keeping the cost of curling affordable for the recreational curler. (I don't want to replace my broom heads every week.) But no blackheads on the ice, please. Our icemaker would stink-eye all of us if we did that.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-22-16 01:33PM
MacCoach is offline Click Here to See the Profile for MacCoach Click here to Send MacCoach a Private Message Find more posts by MacCoach Add MacCoach to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
MacCoach
Harvey Hacksmasher

 

Registered: Jan 2015
Location:
Posts: 18

With all this being said, what about the hair broom for club play? Should it be banned or allowed?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-22-16 01:46PM
AlanMacNeill is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AlanMacNeill Click here to Send AlanMacNeill a Private Message Find more posts by AlanMacNeill Add AlanMacNeill to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
AlanMacNeill
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2011
Location:
Posts: 1064

Depends...

If they develop a "brush" head that is just as effective at removing the frost from the volunteer ice crew's good faith error in overnight maintenance technique (or, for that matter, any of the 100 causes for massive frost)...then sure, ban it in favor of the brush.

But, I have not seen any evidence of that occurring...and I dont' think they studied that at Broomapalooza

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-22-16 02:24PM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:
Originally posted by MacCoach
With all this being said, what about the hair broom for club play? Should it be banned or allowed?


This problem will eventually solve itself, because they aren't making hair brushes anymore. Ethically, one should probably refrain from using a hair brush in club play if there are reasonable alternatives, but as of yet it is not prohibited by the general rules of curling, nor is using your favorite textured brush material (IcePad, EQ+, GR8, etc.)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-23-16 04:01AM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by RockDoc


This problem will eventually solve itself, because they aren't making hair brushes anymore. Ethically, one should probably refrain from using a hair brush in club play if there are reasonable alternatives, but as of yet it is not prohibited by the general rules of curling, nor is using your favorite textured brush material (IcePad, EQ+, GR8, etc.)



Ethically? Why should anyone refrain from using a brush and incur a new cost when they are not outlawed from recreational curling? You make a presumption you have no right to do so. If the WCF and CCA do not outlaw hair brushes for rec play then they are perfectly acceptable. Don't bring your ethics into this particularly when you have openly admitted that you and your fun team have used the technique -not the technology -in recreational Bonspiels and benefitted from it.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 07-23-16 at 04:04AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-23-16 08:11AM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan


Ethically? Why should anyone refrain from using a brush and incur a new cost when they are not outlawed from recreational curling? You make a presumption you have no right to do so. If the WCF and CCA do not outlaw hair brushes for rec play then they are perfectly acceptable. Don't bring your ethics into this particularly when you have openly admitted that you and your fun team have used the technique -not the technology -in recreational Bonspiels and benefitted from it.



Ethics <> Legal. I will note that last season brushing materials were regulated by rule but not technique at the pro level. This approach is likely to continue this year. It is legal to use at the recreational level materials banned at the elite level, but is it ethical? Does it matter if you are playing in the pizza league of if you are competing for the club championship? Is it OK to use a hair brush but not a blackhead? Where does one draw the line? Not trivial questions and the kind of ethics questions my college students struggle with.

Personally, I think it would be a great service if manufacturers and rule makers collaborated to develop approved materials for recreational curlers, materials that are more durable than what the pros may have to use but do not offer exceptional advantage compared to pro materials.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-23-16 05:28PM
jamcan is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jamcan Click here to Send jamcan a Private Message Find more posts by jamcan Add jamcan to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jamcan
Super Rockchucker

 

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: vernon bc
Posts: 2340

quote:
Originally posted by RockDoc


Ethics <> Legal. I will note that last season brushing materials were regulated by rule but not technique at the pro level. This approach is likely to continue this year. It is legal to use at the recreational level materials banned at the elite level, but is it ethical? Does it matter if you are playing in the pizza league of if you are competing for the club championship? Is it OK to use a hair brush but not a blackhead? Where does one draw the line? Not trivial questions and the kind of ethics questions my college students struggle with.

Personally, I think it would be a great service if manufacturers and rule makers collaborated to develop approved materials for recreational curlers, materials that are more durable than what the pros may have to use but do not offer exceptional advantage compared to pro materials.



Asking the question of ethics on the technology is moot if you continue to employ the technique. And the continued refusal of the WCF to ignore technique ultimately makes any rules on technology useless.

Directional sweeping, as I and others have correctly stated,is not a technology. It is a technique. One that was employed-and not fully understood-back in the early 1980's when brushes supplanted corn.

Enough was realized at that time of the negative impacts of snowplowing that rules were drawn up which curtailed it and kept shot making where it belongs: in the skill of the thrower.

The rules worked. And the changes made have never been fully justified other than the vague,unfounded claim it was to difficult to police. For two decades it was easily done yet somehow, someone convinced those in charge otherwise. And now we have returned, full circle, to the 1980s.

Control technology all you want. It won't matter. As long as snowplowing is allowed to continue it will influence a stone greater than an across-the-face motion will. It won't matter what level of play is involved or even if both teams employ the exact same equipment. If one team snowplows and their opponent does not, then the advantage goes to the team using that technique. And that reduces the emphasis on the throwers skill.

Argue with your students about ethics all you wish. Focusing on one aspect of the issue ultimately resolves nothing. The only true ethical question is why, when data also shows a great reduction in sweeping influence when sweeping across the face, the WCF is ignoring technique.

__________________
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Hunter S. Thompson

Last edited by jamcan on 07-23-16 at 05:37PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

07-23-16 07:53PM
RockDoc is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RockDoc Click here to Send RockDoc a Private Message Find more posts by RockDoc Add RockDoc to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RockDoc
Swing Artist

 

Registered: Apr 2005
Location:
Posts: 399

quote:
Originally posted by jamcan


Asking the question of ethics on the technology is moot if you continue to employ the technique. And the continued refusal of the WCF to ignore technique ultimately makes any rules on technology useless.

Directional sweeping, as I and others have correctly stated,is not a technology. It is a technique. One that was employed-and not fully understood-back in the early 1980's when brushes supplanted corn.

Enough was realized at that time of the negative impacts of snowplowing that rules were drawn up which curtailed it and kept shot making where it belongs: in the skill of the thrower.

The rules worked. And the changes made have never been fully justified other than the vague,unfounded claim it was to difficult to police. For two decades it was easily done yet somehow, someone convinced those in charge otherwise. And now we have returned, full circle, to the 1980s.

Control technology all you want. It won't matter. As long as snowplowing is allowed to continue it will influence a stone greater than an across-the-face motion will. It won't matter what level of play is involved or even if both teams employ the exact same equipment. If one team snowplows and their opponent does not, then the advantage goes to the team using that technique. And that reduces the emphasis on the throwers skill.

Argue with your students about ethics all you wish. Focusing on one aspect of the issue ultimately resolves nothing. The only true ethical question is why, when data also shows a great reduction in sweeping influence when sweeping across the face, the WCF is ignoring technique.



You may not agree with the approach of the WCF--as you have repetitively demonstrated--but the rulemaking bodies have agreed on how to proceed, and it doesn't at present include sweeping technique. So there is nothing illegal or unethical about single or angle sweeping. But materials are now regulated at the pro level, and have been since last year. The WCF apparently believes, based on the strength of data collected to date, that the necessary adjustments can be made without having to address technique. Ethics has nothing to do with this choice, but practicality does. We shall see how it works this year.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

All times are GMT. The time now is . Post New Thread   Post A Reply
Page 4 of 5 -- Go to: ««   | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | »»   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to thisThread

Forum Jump:
Rate This Thread:

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

Curling Scores

M: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: M7 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 8:00pm CT
Lannoye  
Hebert    Watch Live Curling!
Fitzgerald 2nd
Cenzalli  Watch Live Curling!
Brenden 2nd
Church  Watch Live Curling!
Guentzel 2nd
Rose  Watch Live Curling!
W: USA Curling Junior National Championships
Eau Claire, WI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: W6 -- Thu, Mar 28 -- 4:00pm CT
Berg Final
Scheel (10) Watch Live Curling!
Berg Final
Schapman (10) Watch Live Curling!
Giroux 10  Final
Pekowitz (9) Watch Live Curling!
Viau Final
Johnson (10) Watch Live Curling!
M: Canadian Mixed Doubles Curling Championship
Fredericton, NB
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF -- Fri, Mar 22 -- 1:00pm AT
Lott/Lott Final
Walk/Muyr (8) Watch Live Curling!
M: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 3:00am ET
Caccivio Final
Brauchli 12  (EE)
Dryburgh Final
Ringgenberg (9)
W: Swiss Junior Championships
Thun, SUI
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: CF2 -- Sun, Mar 24 -- 9:00am CET
Schwaller Final
Oberson (9)
Blackham Final
von Arx (9)
W: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 11:00am MT
Stroeder Final
Delorey (7)
M: NWTCA Curling Club Championships
Fort Smith, NT
Teams | Scores | Standings | Playoffs
Draw: 3 -- Sat, Mar 23 -- 1:00pm ET
Delorey Final
Lockhart (EE)
Full Scoreboard  |  Play Fantasy Pick'em!  

Recent News

Recent
Homan Brings Home Gold

Homan Brings Home Gold

Sydney, Canada - In front of a full house with over 4,000 spectators, Canada (photo: Stephen Fisher, World Curling) beat Switzerland by 7-5 to take gold at the BKT Tires World Women's Curling Championship 2024.

Curling Photos

Recent

Curling Blogs

Facebook Feed

Twitter Feed

To top ↑